Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 22:08:43 +0200 From: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Alexander Best <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de>, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: compat.linux.osrelease behavior Message-ID: <20090920200843.GA36192@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20090920204407.0000383a@unknown> References: <permail-20090918130831f0889e8400005dd6-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de> <20090919223624.00004f42@unknown> <20090920063017.GA12687@freebsd.org> <20090920204407.0000383a@unknown>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 08:44:07PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:30:17 +0200 Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org> > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 10:36:24PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:08:31 +0200 (CEST) Alexander Best > > > <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > hi there, > > > > > > > > i have a question regarding the behavior of > > > > compat.linux.osrelease. setting it to 2.4.2 sets linuxulator into > > > > 2.4 kernel-emulation and 2.6.16 sets it into 2.6 kernel-emulation > > > > right? > > > > > > Sort of. 2.6.x set's 2.6 mode, and everything else is 2.4 mode. But > > > this is AFAIK only a semantic change of some functions. This does > > > not disable syscalls which are in 2.6 but not in 2.4. > > > > > > > but what happens when compat.linux.osrelease gets set to a > > > > different value? ports/Updating entry 20071101 e.g. advises skype > > > > users to set compat.linux.osrelease to 2.4.20. does this trigger > > > > 2.6 kernel-emulation because 2.4.20 > 2.4.2 or are there more > > > > than two kernel-emulation layers inside the linuxulator?? > > > > > > It does not affect the kernel emulation. But the glibc will try to > > > use new syscalls. > > > > actually it does change how the kernel emulation works. grep for > > linux_use26() > > I don't find the place where the behavior is changed when 2.4.20 is > set... I only see a change when it is set to 2.6.x. the thing with 2.4.20 is that red hat backported NPTL to 2.4.20 kernel. so the userland expects NTPL but we dont provide it. I dont think it's worth solving... the default is 2.6.16 and I dont see much reason why anyone would need 2.4.20...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090920200843.GA36192>